Note the use of the term “Bodily Distress Syndrome (BDS)” despite the lack of a body of evidence to support the validity, reliability, safety and clinical utility of the application of the BSD construct* in primary care.

The term ‘medically unexplained symptoms (MUS)’ are physical symptoms that cannot be explained by organic pathology, which distress or impair the functioning of the patient. Patients often present with physical symptoms that cannot be explained even after thorough investigation. Other terms used to describe this patient group include: Functional Somatic Syndrome (FSS), Illness Distress Symptoms (IDS), Idiopathic Physical Symptoms (IPS), Bodily Distress Syndrome (BDS) and Medically Unexplained Physical Symptoms (MUPS).

• To pilot a commissioner initiated, enhanced GP management service for patients with MUS in primary care. Refer to Figure 1 for details.

• The pilot will be carried out at selected Barnet GP practices (approximately 15) managing a minimum of 10 patients with MUS over 12 months.

• To identify patients with MUS using an electronic risk stratification tool the ‘Nottingham Tool’ with a review of the generated list at a multidisciplinary (MDT) GP practice meeting for the final patient selection.

• To enhance post-graduate GP training by providing education and training workshops and focused work group meetings on the management of MUS.

• The project will also test the assertion that identification and management of MUS would result in savings to commissioning budgets.

PROJECT OUTCOMES AND BENEFITS

There are several benefits that could be realised from implementing this project. These are as follows:-

There is a high prevalence of patients with medically unexplained symptoms presenting to primary and secondary care services. Patients with MUS are high healthcare service users having a major impact to our local health economy and health outcomes. GPs are well placed to manage MUS patients as this patient group are 50% more likely to attend primary care. We believe that our proposed enhanced management of care by the GP will result in both market and non-market benefits. This proposal has gained approval from the NHS Barnet CCG Primary Care Strategy and Implementation Board, QIPP Board and the NCL Programme Board for the 2013/14 financial year…

Source

This study examined psychologists’ views and practices regarding diagnostic classification systems for mental and behavioral disorders so as to inform the development of the ICD-11 by the World Health Organization (WHO). WHO and the International Union of Psychological Science (IUPsyS) conducted a multilingual survey of 2155 psychologists from 23 countries, recruited through their national psychological associations. Sixty percent of global psychologists routinely used a formal classification system, with ICD-10 used most frequently by 51% and DSM-IV by 44%. Psychologists viewed informing treatment decisions and facilitating communication as the most important purposes of classification, and preferred flexible diagnostic guidelines to strict criteria. Clinicians favorably evaluated most diagnostic categories, but identified a number of problematic diagnoses. Substantial percentages reported problems with crosscultural applicability and cultural bias, especially among psychologists outside the USA and Europe. Findings underscore the priority of clinical utility and professional and cultural differences in international psychology. Implications for ICD-11 development and dissemination are discussed.